Hello, SCP Foundation! Foremost, it's a privilege to finally be a part of this wonderful community. I've read many articles (stories) and none have ever, and never would have, ceased to amaze me. They all aspire me. So, I've written my own!

link is below

For anybody wondering, I've written a couple of stories in the past (none clinically-similar with the Foundation) for our school paper, and I've gotten the hang with writing document-style works because of our investigatory projects and all.

Quick summary of my entry:

Cognitohazard cloud formation-anomaly resembling a disembodied head that, once, leveled a town in an FK-class event. The rest will be there.

Anyways, what I've hoped to accomplish with my SCP entry is a mood inside it, and to set the 'monster'. I tried to accomplish that by excluding the Description, which actually falls out of what's conventional; added a few 'notes' here and there; and I tried to implement the mood within the Procedures by limiting it to simple instructions. No really, I did, go read it yourself.

Other than what I want to accomplish, some simple grammatical errors (thanks in advance grammarians), sentence construction, punctuation, etc.

We don't really use this anymore, it's a bit of a relic of the past (read: cliche) at this point. What you CAN do, is put something like:

''Unauthorised access will have the offender liable to disciplinary action, including amnestic treatment, demotion or termination.''

That way it's not as cliche. Your choice really, it's stylistic. That said, formatting quirks are something that not everyone responds to well unless it's a big deal, with SCP's that are the first of a series for example.

DO not look at the God.

You don't have to CAPITALISE for emphasis. This is a professional document, people are expected to follow it to the letter:

''Visual contact with [SCP DESIGNATION] is not permitted.''

Physical interaction is forbidden. Direct sight is forbidden. DO not look at the God.

Yes, we understand it.

Conducting misbehavior against the special containment procedures is punishable—by external methods—however the misconduct in question will already serve as a rightful punishment and better compromise than to [REDACTED].

This is unnecessary information at best, and only there to add dramatic effect at worst. I recommend removing this in its entirety.

The roadway leading to POI 3393-D-2, and the ███████ accommodating POI 3393-D-2's containment chamber, has been blocked off.

A perimeter is established 30km from the center of ███████, and no non-Foundation personnel are to pass this limit.

Don't censor information in the Special Containment Procedures. Think about it: In-universe, this doesn't make sense because if I'm supposed to learn how to contain something successfully, I need to have complete information.

I'm personally indifferent to formatting quirks like ones used here, but not everyone might respond to it well. Something to keep in mind, although it's ultimately your choice. If it's written well enough, most people won't care.

The white text is a detail I noticed, but I'm not sure if it adds much to the narrative. I guess it does, so I'm not particularly against it.

[DATA EXPUNGED UNDER ORDER OF THE O5 COUNCIL]

This however, is going to be a mayor sticking point for people. Why? It's going to be very difficult the balance between feeding your readers enough information to figure out what it is, versus flat-out saying it. In-universe problems:

The O5's redact the entire description of the anomaly, but they don't remove the photo? That makes very little sense in-universe.

The document is Level 4 classified, meaning that access is already restricted. However, the description is then censored anyway. What is the point of classifying information which is then removed regardless?

If the anomaly itself is so dangerous, it needs to be very clear how to contain this effectively. This is something that's done very well by SCP-231. Note that despite the absolute avalanche of censoring, it's still very clear how to effectively contain it outside of mentioning the Montauk procedure, which is serving the narrative in a meaningful way. The containment procedures are effectively a way to make a reader think: ''Whoa, what the actual hell is this anomaly? This is sounding really messed up.'' The article you wrote so far doesn't really do anything to elicit a response in the same way.

This one is more subjective, but the tone goes non-clinical too quickly. It would be effective if it started out professionally, but went more emotional as the article went on. Right now, there's not enough to do that effectively since the actual meat of the article is cut short so quickly.

All in all it can work, but you've made it extremely hard for yourself by doing something so ambitious as a first SCP. I recommend you get some experience with less difficult concepts (because I can tell you're a competent writer) and come back to this concept later.